On 18 Feb 2015, at 21:19, Keith Edmunds <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 16:37:45 +0000, [email protected] said: > >> it really narks the establishment and companies that software peeps get >> paid more than senior managers > > Correction: it may nark SOME of the group you identify. However, it's > pretty much guaranteed that anything will annoy someone somewhere. :) > >> and there is an ongoing effort by >> companies to lower salaries by making it a commodity job. > > Some companies will pay the lowest rate they can. That's usually reflected > in the quality of their staff and hence their business. HSBC, HBOS, > >> and don't be so naive to suggest that people of the future will need >> more computing skills, if anything computing skills will be required >> less as tooling and AI becomes more sophisticated and automated. 10 >> years from now we will simply ask a machine to write software for us and >> only a very small number of people will be in a position to modify that >> base code. > > Rubbish. There was an AI program released in the early 80s called "The > Last One", so named because it would be the last program one would need to > buy (it created programs for you). It wasn't. Even if AI advances to the > level you suggest within ten years (it won't), why would anyone ask an AI > system to write a program? most solutions once discovered can be coded as a template and data. It is then possible to apply reflective coding methods to infuse data (raw and derived) with a solution template, this then then re-executes each time evolving the code and output in a feedback loop until a solution is found. Just look at how proteins, raw materials and DNA work together, its a purely mechanical process, he outcomes however, are magical. > Programs are a means to and end (for most > people); it would be more likely that someone would ask such an AI system > to ensure that the car is serviced overnight rather than to write a > program to ensure it is serviced overnight. > > As for the quality of AI in ten years' time: speech recognition is an > amazingly hard problem to crack, although the last thirty years has seen > some modest progress. Having a system *understand* speech is a long way > off. Look at how poor computerised translation programs are: the problem > is that they don't understand what is being said. They merely use a > (complex) algorithm to swap one language for another. "The cat is black" > may be easy to translate into "Le chat est noir", but it will be some time > before "I'm going to stretch my legs" becomes "Je vais pour une promenade" > (unless each such phrase is individually coded, but still the AI system > doesn't *understand*). I genuinely think within ten years there will be an evolutionary leap in AI. I agree what exists today is a side show, but even 5 years from now that side show will be vastly more than it is now, then there will be a WTF thats super cool moment. > > Why do you mostly start sentences with lower case letters? > -- > "Why does God hate me so much? Is it because I don't believe in him?" - > Sidney Morgenbesser > > > -- > Please post to: [email protected] > Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire > LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk > -------------------------------------------------------------- -- Please post to: [email protected] Web Interface: https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/hampshire LUG URL: http://www.hantslug.org.uk --------------------------------------------------------------
